Trial reportBJU international2022
Robot-assisted vs ultrasonography-guided transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block vs local anaesthesia in urology: results of the UROTAP randomized trial.
Trial report in BJU international, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- The association between the cutaneous sensory block area, the surgical incision's location, and the block's analgesic efficacy: a post hoc sensitivity analysis of data from a controlled randomised multicentre trial.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Trial
- Clinical value analysis of integrated care model in reducing bleeding and complications during Da Vinci robot-assisted urology.Medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo prospectively analyse robotically administered transperitoneal transversus abdominis plane (robot-assisted transversus abdominis plane [RTAP]) compared with both ultrasonography-guided transversus abdominis plane (UTAP) and local anaesthesia (LA) with regard to pain control and narcotic use in patients undergoing robot-assisted prostatectomy (RARP) or robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN). SUBJECTS/PATIENTS AND
methodsPatients undergoing RARP or RAPN were randomized in a single-blind 2:2:1 fashion to RTAP:UTAP:LA, with the study powered to evaluate superiority of UTAP to LA and non-inferiority of RTAP to UTAP. We compared time to deliver the block, operating room time, postoperative pain scores using the visual analogue scale, and intra-operative and postoperative analgesia consumption.
resultsA total of 143 patients were randomized and received treatment. There was no significant difference in patient baseline characteristics. UTAP did not demonstrate superiority to LA in terms of pain control. RTAP and LA were faster to administer than UTAP (time to perform block 2.5 vs 2.5 vs 6.25 min; P < 0.001). There was no difference in postoperative narcotic, acetaminophen, ketorolac or ondansetron requirements among the three groups (P > 0.05). The study was terminated early due to the unexpected efficacy of LA.
conclusionThis study showed that UTAP and RTAP do not provide superior pain control to LA. The efficiency, effectiveness, and ease of administration of LA make it an excellent option for first-line therapy for postoperative analgesia.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.